Ottawa to present final offers in stagnant land claim negotiations

The federal government is moving to present what it calls “final offers” in dozens of First Nations land claim negotiations that have been dragging on for years.

Any specific land claim negotiation that has been thoroughly explored and under active consideration for three years or longer will be receiving a final offer, explained a senior Aboriginal Affairs official.

Aboriginal Affairs Minister and Northern Development Minister John Duncan.

“Where we make final offers is where we feel we have all the information gathered,” said the official, who spoke on condition of anonymity.

If the First Nations in question don’t want to put the final offer to band members for approval, they can take their case for a binding ruling before the Specific Claims Tribunal. Or they can take Ottawa to court, the official explained.

“The conversation doesn’t end with a final offer,” she said.

First Nations chiefs are concerned because the Specific Claims Tribunal is only authorized to agree to $250 million in settlements per year, for 10 years, and no settlement can be bigger than $150 million. Specific claims can run anywhere from $3 million to well over $150 million, native officials say.

Department officials would not say how many final offers they are preparing. They say that if there is still room for progress in some of the ongoing negotiations, they will stay at the table.

Aboriginal leaders have said about 65 negotiations are at stake — a number the government official said sounds reasonable.

Suspicion of federal motives has been on the rise, with a growing fear that Ottawa is playing hardball in many negotiations, said B.C. Regional Chief Jody Wilson-Raybould.

That’s why chiefs with the Assembly of First Nations passed a resolution this month telling Ottawa to back off, she said.

“Canada is taking a take-it-or-leave-it approach to specific claim settlement offers,” the chiefs stated this month at their meeting in Moncton, accusing Ottawa of negotiating in “bad faith.”

The federal government argues that the approach of putting forward a final offer after three years of talks was always part of the process agreed to by First Nations and the government in 2008.

“Our government is working with First Nations to conclude settlements within a three-year time frame whenever possible. We remain serious about our commitment to continue to negotiate and resolve specific claims,” a spokeswoman for Aboriginal Affairs Minister John Duncan said in an email statement.

But First Nations groups say the move is an ultimatum that betrays the spirit of the Specific Claims Tribunal Act.

“A decision to terminate negotiations ought to be based on the principles of good faith, respect and mutuality, rather than arbitrariness and unilateralism,” the chiefs said in their Moncton resolution.

In 2008, Ottawa set up the tribunal process to deal with backlogs in specific claims talks. The tribunal was meant as an incentive to get Ottawa and First Nations to agree more quickly to a negotiated settlement. It gives First Nations the option to take their cases to the tribunal for a binding ruling after they’ve negotiated with Ottawa for three years.

Now that three years has passed, the tribunal has just opened its doors to accept cases.

But First Nations say the decision to move to the tribunal is theirs, not Ottawa’s.

“It was never intended to be used against First Nations claimants,” said Wilson-Raybould.

Anger among aboriginals over Ottawa’s settlement plans are rising as word spreads, said Grand Chief Stewart Phillip, president of the Union of B.C. Indian Chiefs.

“There’s a sense of betrayal developing across the country in regard to this move on the part of Canada,” said Phillip, who is on Haida Gwaii in northwest B.C. where he was preparing to meet with the Haida Nation to discuss claims issues.

“It’s disingenuous and deceitful on the part of Canada to create the illusion that they’re committed to resolving a large number of outstanding specific claims,” said Phillip.

“When in fact they are deliberately bringing forward lowball offers that communities will be forced to reject and at that point in time the only option available is litigation or referring these matters to the specific claims tribunal which has a very limited mandate and a very limited budget.”